PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

OT: Bruins and Celtics - will they ever be relevant again


What are Celtics, and by Bruins, do you mean from UCLA.
 
With the Bruins stinking badly and the Celtics getting the 5th pick in the draft..will these teams ever be relevant again ?
What do the UCLA Bruins and the Cincinnati Celts have to do with this messageboard?
 
Why do the Pats & Sox rule New England?

1. Because those are sports people can relate to. Everybody has played football and baseball. Basketball, too, for that matter, but I'll get to that in point #3.

2. The Pats & the Sox give fans their money's worth year in and year out.
Hockey's pretty popular around NE if you haven't noticed. Ever been to the Hockey East finals, BeanPot tourney, or even Massachusett's High School Elite 8 tournament. Bruins were a pretty hot ticket even in the Celtic's heyday! Both franchises will find their way to the top of the hill again. How long! That's the question?
 
The key component in any good hockey team is a great goalie. The Bruins haven't even had a GOOD goalie since Lemelin. Regarding this years team, IMO they had no goalie, and only Chara on D. The other 5 defensemen aren't even worthy NHL players. But the biggest problem with that team is the coach. Lewis is terrible!! Never tape to tape passes, always chasing the puck, no heart or intensity what so ever. What happened to Bergeron? I felt like (and still do) he was gonna be another yzerman. Didn't happen!!

Whoa, whoa, whoa.

Okay, okay, let me hit those points one at a time sir.

1) No good goalie since Lemelin? Andy Moog might have a bone to pick with you, and Lord Byron Dafoe was quite good until contract squabbles got in the way of him actually playing. Raycroft was a Calder winner, but it looks like the B's passed him off on the Leafs for a potential elite goaltender in one of the greatest trade coups I've seen in awhile. Thomas really is not bad at all, just overworked; the Bruins have bigger problems than goaltending, especially with Rask and Toivonen in the wings. I'm a goaltender myself and always keep an eye on goalies, and I truly believe Toivonen will follow a similar career path to J.S. Giguere, who was traded twice (for Trevor Kidd, then a 2nd round pick) before he broke out around his 25th or 26th birthday (hopefully Hannu doesn't get traded, though).

2) No defensemen besides Chara? Well, Andrew Ference played a signficant role as a #4-5 on a Stanley Cup Finals team the year before the lockout, and, despite being undersized, is still a good player. Aaron Ward was the #2 on last year's Hurricanes squad that won the Cup, and is still amongst the best shot blockers in the league, though he's really more of a #3-4. Andrew Alberts is a great #5-6, though he is a bit of a liability if called on to do too much as the Bruins did. He hits hard and is willing to fight (even if he's not much of a brawler), and is pretty defensively responsible, though limited offensively and will never have a shot. Dennis Wideman could still be a good offensive defenseman, though I'm not a huge fan of his skating ability and I think the Blues stole Boyes. Bobby Allen's a good AHLer, and Jason York needs to retire. But Lashoff and Stuart will be good NHL players; Lashoff's more offensively oriented while Stuart is a (very) poor man's Scott Stevens. The Bruins do need a true #2 defenseman, preferably with some offensive ability, to stick with Chara, but they have alot more holes to fill than just that, especially with their forwards.

3) Bergeron's not Yzerman yet? Come on, man, he hasn't even been legal for a year yet! You can't expect the world of this guy, not yet. He's on a horrendous team and had to assume the mantle of the savior of the Bruins after Joe was traded. That's alot of expectation on a 21 year old! Luckily for him, he's settled more into the second center role with Savard's ascendance (and second future superstar role with Kessel's arrival) and that's where a guy like him shines (see Chris Drury, his equivalent in player type, though Bergeron is slightly more skilled).

Listen, this Bruins team is pretty bad. Sure, they have a stable of good prospects and some good players. The coaching is bad, I'll agree with you there. But at the same time, for the most part, the team is filled with what I term "guys" (or JAGs in football terms). This team runs maybe a line and a half deep (Savard, Murray, Kessel, Bergeron, Sturm), and on defense maybe a pairing deep (Chara, Ward) before you get into guys who would be easily replaceable by any number of players across the league (Thomas is purely average even though I love the guy... but Rask and Toivonen should develop enough to hold down that fort in a couple years). Sure, there are specialist players (Axelsson as the checking forward, Wideman as the offensive defenseman), but those guys are either not that good (Wideman) or pure luxuries (Axe) that need to be replaced with actual players. Sure, you need guys and luxuries on any team that plans to run deep into the playoffs, but this team needs to focus on quitting the bottom feeding first. I think that will take a few years, but luckily the expensive stars (barring Murray) are still relatively young and will be around and good when the youngsters start to hit their strides. I can see this team coming together within the next 3-5 years to become a serious contender led by a core of Savard, Kessel, Bergeron, Chara, and Rask.

Oh, and ADPF, just about every New England kid plays hockey at some point in their life. As a playing sport, it's far more popular than basketball in the northeast (except maybe NYC and Long Island, but they're usually too pansy for hockey anyways).
 
Last edited:
Even if the B's get better, who is going to care? The NHL is becoming less relevant by the minute. They cut off the conference finals in OT last weekend to give you a full hour of a horse racing pregame show! When horses walking around a track is preempting your conference finals, that is a baaaaaaad sign. The NHL is off ESPN and now on OLN and Vs. I wouldn't even be surprised if the NHL folds within the next 20 years.

Maybe the Ottawa vs Anaheim Stanley Cup Finals will capture the country's imagination. :D
 
As a playing sport, it's far more popular than basketball in the northeast (except maybe NYC and Long Island, but they're usually too pansy for hockey anyways).

Hockey is more popular as a playing sport?! Are you talking about northeast Finland?
 
Hockey's pretty popular around NE if you haven't noticed. Ever been to the Hockey East finals, BeanPot tourney, or even Massachusett's High School Elite 8 tournament. Bruins were a pretty hot ticket even in the Celtic's heyday!
Assuming you mean the Celtics heyday of the 80's (and not the 60's) then, yes, the Bruins were popular too - because they had a few darn good years in there themselves. They made the Stanley Cup finals twice in that period, not too shabby.
 
Even if the B's get better, who is going to care? The NHL is becoming less relevant by the minute. They cut off the conference finals in OT last weekend to give you a full hour of a horse racing pregame show! When horses walking around a track is preempting your conference finals, that is a baaaaaaad sign. The NHL is off ESPN and now on OLN and Vs. I wouldn't even be surprised if the NHL folds within the next 20 years.

I'd be surprised, because the NHL is making a good chunk of money and the cap is rising every year despite a national television contract. But please, continue to speak out of your ass.

And I'd say organized hockey has more players in the northeast and northern midwest/Mountain west than organized basketball does. In Boston, high school hockey receives as much if not more attention than football, and much more than basketball, while college hockey is the king.

You can't play hockey in a park, but many hockey players started on a pond anyways. Sure, it's a relatively small region of the country, but hockey is continuing to grow in California, Texas, and a team from Alabama even made the NCAAs this year (though most of their players are Canadian).
 
This a topic I discuss a lot with my roommate. He is a die hard Bruins fan and I am a die hard Celtics fan.

I think Both teams will be relevant in the near future. But, I think the Celtics could be relevant as soon as next year. The Celtics have a very young and deep team. If it wasnt for all the injuries, I think they would have made the playoffs last year. Add the fifth pick and/or a trade for an established player. Then the Celtics could be a strong playoff team in the weak eastern conference.

IMO, The Bruins are a littler farther off. The Bruins could be really good if they found a top tier Goalie. Rask might be that guy but I think he is still a year or two away.
 
No..not for awhile...the bruins have been horrible for a long time and it will stay that way... The Celts as well are NOT relevent..and will not be for awhile. Ainge is not the one to lead them..taking their best team in awhile and dismantling it. bright move danny boy..you can't even get to that point now can you!!
That team needed a big man and a point guard..in a few years, they could have IF he was so bright..but instead..dismantle it all lie about what you are doing and play in dung the basement for years doing nothing...Not happening as long as he is in the org..
 
I love the relevent people. What the **** does being relevent mean? If you're not contending for a championship, then you better suck azz, draft high, or be building your way there some how. In the rush to be "relevent" the C's traded away Chauncey Billups and Joe Johnson. How'd that work out for ya? They're rumored to be looking to dump a 10 year all star in waiting for some more fools gold later this week. Relevent is ridiculous. The Bruins were relevent for 25 years, but were never a serious contender. What was the point? I'll take the Celtics of the 80's, the Pat's of the last 6 years, the B's during the 70's, and the current Sox over being "relevent" but without a chance at a championship.
 
Last edited:
If Jeremy Jacobs drops dead, the B's have a shot.
 


TRANSCRIPT: Eliot Wolf’s Pre-Draft Press Conference 4/18/24
Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/18: News and Notes
Wednesday Patriots Notebook 4/17: News and Notes
Tuesday Patriots Notebook 4/16: News and Notes
Monday Patriots Notebook 4/15: News and Notes
Patriots News 4-14, Mock Draft 3.0, Gilmore, Law Rally For Bill 
Potential Patriot: Boston Globe’s Price Talks to Georgia WR McConkey
Friday Patriots Notebook 4/12: News and Notes
Not a First Round Pick? Hoge Doubles Down on Maye
Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/11: News and Notes
Back
Top